Personal-recovery-oriented community mental healthcare: qualitative evaluation of a developmental project

OBJECTIVES

Mental healthcare is commonly aimed at reducing symptoms in individual service users. When only symptomatic recovery is addressed, not all service users experience sufficient recovery, and when care is aimed only at individuals (instead of the neighbourhood), not all people in need of mental healthcare are reached. This study evaluated a project that aimed to improve mental healthcare in a neighbourhood, by improving healthcare providers' outreach to the residents living in the neighbourhood, by improving collaboration among healthcare providers and focussing on the residents' personal recovery. This project was carried out by several public health services. It aimed to change the goal of mental healthcare provided in the neighbourhood from symptom reduction to personal recovery.

DESIGN

The study included qualitative focus groups and inductive content analysis.

SETTING

Primary and secondary mental healthcare that healthcare workers from different healthcare services provided.

PARTICIPANTS

The evaluation was conducted through three focus group interviews with services users, their friends and relatives, neighbourhood residents, neighbourhood representatives and the healthcare services that were involved (n = 24).

RESULTS

Evaluation indicated that the most valued part of the project was the utilisation of peer workers at the initiation of mental healthcare. Improved communication among healthcare providers that the project fostered was also highly regarded. The aim of the project to align it with existing initiatives in the neighbourhood was also considered important, although it was difficult to achieve.

CONCLUSIONS

The project did not find a panacea for recovery-oriented community mental healthcare. A variety of its components did, however, contribute to the mental health of the community residents.

Substituting specialist care for patients with severe mental illness with primary healthcare. Experiences in a mixed methods study

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Care planning and coordination are currently insufficiently based on scientific insights due to a lack of knowledge on this topic. Most patients with severe mental illness receive long-term treatment from specialized mental health services. This long-term, highly intensive treatment is not always the best option for two reasons. Firstly, because as long as a patient receives intensive treatment aimed at safety, it is hard for that patient to take full responsibility for their own life. Secondly, because care is not available unlimitedly, some patients are waiting to receive specialist mental healthcare while others who do not need it anymore still receive it. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Most stable patients with severe mental illness can be treated outside of specialized mental health services. Some patients are too dependent on a specific mental healthcare professional to be referred to primary healthcare. In such instances, a referral will most likely lead to destabilization and the referral will therefore be unsuccessful. Patients preferred primary healthcare to specialized mental health services, mainly because of the absence of stigma associated with the latter. There should be more attention for personal recovery (especially the social support system) of patients with severe mental illness who are referred to primary healthcare services. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Most stable patients with severe mental illness can be treated in primary healthcare. Professionals in primary healthcare should keep personal recovery in mind when treating patients, focusing on problem solving skills and also making use of social support systems. ABSTRACT: Aim/question Care planning and coordination are currently insufficiently based on scientific insights due to a lack of knowledge on this topic. In the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, most patients with severe mental illness receive long-term specialized mental healthcare, even when they are stable. This study aims to explore the outcome of these stable patients when they are referred to primary healthcare. Methods Patients (N = 32) receiving specialized mental healthcare that were referred to primary healthcare were interviewed in focus groups, as were the involved professionals (N = 6). Results 84% of the participants still received primary healthcare after 12 months. Despite the successful referral, the patient's personal recovery did not always profit. The participants of the focus groups agreed that some patients were too dependent on a specific mental healthcare professional to be referred to primary healthcare. Discussion Most stable patients with severe mental illness can be referred to primary healthcare. Personal recovery and dependency on a specific healthcare provider should be considered when referring a patient to primary healthcare. Implications for practice Professionals in community mental healthcare teams should consider a referral to primary mental healthcare in stable patients. Professionals in primary healthcare should keep the patient's personal recovery in mind.